Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 4228010" data-attributes="member: 32536">I grasp your point just fine. You want to have the option to either be a classic musician bard with loremaster abilities or a non-musician bard with loremaster abilities. You want the "musician" class and the "loremaster" class to be fused together as the same thing, as the same class. I understand your point, and I have been disagreeing with it from the start.I don't see what niche protection has to do with this. So far, I have only argued for the existence of a single class: an Arcane Leader called the Bard who uses music to buff and support his allies, while possibly being able to do arcane debuffs, charms, illusions, and magical attacks with his songs. This class I am arguing for would have no 'Loremaster" aspects at all (since I have already claimed that I don't think such a thing has any place being the basis of a class).Other possibilities I briefly mentioned, like a Master Inqusitive Paragon Path, would probably not even be Arcane, and certainly not a Leader. If anything, it might take the form of the Negotiator from D20 Modern, which I would easily call a Martial Controller... It would have nothing to do with the Bard's niche in the slightest.I am sorry, but I don't accept your logic at all. My desire is not ridiculous in the slightest.There is no organization that the Fighter must have a connection to in order to be a Fighter. A fighter can be trained by a single lone swordsman, can be self-taught, or may have been trained in the army. The fluff and class features of a fighter won't even be changed in the slightest based on such a distinction. Being a fighter also doesn't mean that the Fighter has any kind of automatic membership in some global order of Fighters, either.The same is true for almost every other class. A Rogue does not need to be part of a thieves' guild for any reason. A Wizard can just as easily be an orphan trained by a lone wizard out in the forest as he can be part of a great order of mages who secretly control the world from behind the scenes. A Paladin can be a humble farmboy chosen by the gods themselves as easily as he could be born into an ancient order of holy knights who serve the church. Even the warlock, which comes far and away the closest to the idea you are arguing for because they must have a pact with some supernatural entity, has no forced connection to anything but that one generic supernatural entity.Really, this has nothing to do with "how much air time the DM gives to PC organizations" and everything to do with "how free is the PC to choose his place in the world" and "what is the absolute minimum number of elements the DM is forced to put into a campaign". So far, every class announced so far for 4E matches my criteria. But, because your proposal is founded upon the idea that every Bard must be a part of one of these Bardic Colleges in order to even use their class features, it does not.</blockquote>

Verification